What is Digg?155 Comments
- Carsonauto, on 10/11/2007, -3/+134Then divorce it and take half it's money.
- hansblix, on 10/11/2007, -14/+141Google is just another left-wing nut job liberal company.
Only those kinds of people care about free, renewable energy sources.
OIL is the wave of the future people! Get with the program!
/sarscasm (this is actually awesome) - TrainingName, on 10/11/2007, -3/+86More like 1.21 Googlewatts.
- CUclimber, on 10/11/2007, -1/+71I've said it before and I'll say it again: When I can buy 3 panels at Home Depot and install them in 4 hours with a few beers, solar will truly have arrived.
I hope that day is sooner rather than later. - Roger, on 10/11/2007, -6/+58I'd marry Google if I could.
- lnxaddct, on 10/11/2007, -1/+52Solar panels are rather pricey. But someone has to start buying them in order to get the prices down, fortunately we have Google.
- ihascheezburger, on 10/11/2007, -13/+61You should give a *****.
- Xavier1012, on 10/11/2007, -4/+37in the future we'll all be searching for information on the Google search engine using computers powered by Google-tricity with "Google-inside"
...and later we'll participate in the bi-weekly bowing down ceremony to our Googlelords - ahawks, on 10/11/2007, -0/+33It looks like they put solar panels over the parking lot(s)? I know it would be a large investment, but imagine the benefits if all parking lots were covered with a roof and solar panels.
- Reduced ground-level temperature
- No more painfully hot cars
- insane amounts of energy generated
- much less bird crap on your windshield - cmcarson, on 10/11/2007, -0/+31Coming Soon: Google Power -- 1 Gigawatt Free
- hansblix, on 10/11/2007, -3/+33@fkr3
So, how many solar panels are you using?
(30% is a significant number when you are talking about Google's peak energy needs) - tratten, on 10/11/2007, -1/+30It's an office building. They don't try to be a power plant.
The average office building produces about 0.00 MW... - tucsonsun13, on 10/11/2007, -10/+38America=pathetic (at times)
A company that hardly specializes in alternative energy is able to create a side project that totally dwarfs any serious attempts by the government to address climate change/pollution.
And we wonder why the glaciers are melting. - celeb, on 10/11/2007, -2/+26http://www.eispv.com/google_video.html
Here's a video of the conceptual design. - gregmo, on 10/11/2007, -4/+26Google really is one company that keeps me wanting more. Their services are amazing, but the way they run their business is just another reason I want to see them succeed with every project.
- Tysto, on 10/11/2007, -1/+20It's cool that Google put solar panels on their roof, but that's not the genius. The triple word score here is creating a sweet webpage just to show other corporate doofuses that it's worth it.
- Tysto, on 10/11/2007, -5/+23@xavier1012
Dude, I just reported you to the GBI. - tizz66, on 10/11/2007, -1/+19Hmmm. It seems I am indeed retarded.
*sulks* - Jon211, on 10/11/2007, -3/+21No, given that 24 hours ago was already half way through June 18th
- Protoss, on 10/11/2007, -6/+23Makes sense...With so much roof space, why the hell not install some solar panels.
- vikingcoder, on 10/11/2007, -5/+22@fkr3
RTFA.
>>
This installation is projected to produce enough electricity for approximately 1,000 California homes or 30% of Google's peak electricity demand in our solar powered buildings at our Mountain View, CA headquarters.
>> - dezmd, on 10/11/2007, -0/+16Fry's carries solar panels right now.
- MCHampster, on 10/11/2007, -0/+15I'll tell you exactly why solar panels aren't adopted more in countries like the US (read: mostly free market economy):
Solar electricity is more expensive than other forms of electricity. Yes, it's renewable. Yes, the actual source of the energy (the sun) is free. But the cost of the panels and maintenance, along with their expected lifespan makes this a non-optimal purely economic choice for the time being. However, cost of other forms of energy are rising and if the cost of panels can come down, it may eventually be a real solution. - lnxaddct, on 10/11/2007, -1/+14tizz66,
No irregularities. The system went live yesterday, so it only has data for roughly 2 days. So out of roughly 2 days (don't know what time the system went live on the 18th), roughly 62% was generated in the past 24 hours. What is irregular about those numbers? - tim620, on 10/11/2007, -2/+15Awesome. I have even more respect for Google now.
- rabidg00se, on 10/11/2007, -4/+15http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flux_capacitor#.22Jiggawatt.22
It's gigawatts. - econoar, on 10/11/2007, -7/+17It really is crazy that the U.S. (or the World) hasn't adopted technology like this. It isn't too hard to install and it can save so much if everyone adopted it.
Wouldn't it be funny if Google was the energy provider in the future? - PhonicUK, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9Im supprised nobodys thought of putting tiny generators under every key in your keyboard. That way we really would generate electricity by Googling...
- jwreed, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10At least one company is using the billions of dollars they have for something useful!! Good for them....
- battletrax, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10Equivalent to ... 10,463 pop tarts poppin! sweet
Do not dugg down happiness. Its unethical. - roseap, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11At the rate they use power, and the fact that the sun is plentiful in CA, that investment will pay for itself in no time. The environmental benefit is an added bonus.
- Jo9100, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9if only every company in the world would be like them...
- Xeth, on 10/11/2007, -3/+11WTF are you talking about? Sandia National Labs has been researching solar and other alternative energies since the 1980's. It's basic research from those kinds of institutions that allow the economics of solar power to improve to this point, where it can reasonably compete with traditional sources and be used by Google as a publicity stunt.
- InvisibleMan, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9I wonder how much that cost them, and when they predict on breaking even. It makes sense that a software company who I would guess has a huge electric bill would want to create their own electricity and turn that bill into a revenue stream.
- mrsteve007, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8The average industrial rate in Southern California is 12.40 per kWh. They've generated 9,810 kWh in the last 24 hours. So about $1216 saved today. That's $444,000 saved per year. Times the panels 30-year lifetime = 13.3 million dollars
Considering they probably got the panels below $1,000 each (for a total or $9,800,000 installed), they will make money in the long term without any rebates. Right now the feds offer a no-limit 30% tax rebate on commercial solar projects, so right off the get-go they get 3-million back in taxes (thats nothing to google, but it helps). Add on the state, local, and power provider rebates, along with green-tags, I'd put their payback at about 4-5 years.
I'm in charge of my company's solar 10kw project that will go online in four weeks. - DiggMasterJ, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8This isn't regular electricity, it's googletricity!
1,024 watts = 1 kilowatt
1,024 kilowatts = 1 megawatt
1,073,741,824 watts = 1 gigawatt
energy of an idea = 1 googlewatt - ShepherdBook, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10FTA: Unfortunately, the panels can only provide 30% of what those office buildings (not including other facilities, datacenters, etc.) use.
- Rileyper, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7I hope it makes the algorithm faster
- vikingcoder, on 10/11/2007, -4/+11@fkr3
Do you mean they should be doing stuff like this?
http://blog.outer-court.com/archive/2007-06-19-n17.html#urs
Google's use of evaporative cooling results in data centers results in "50% less energy than standard industry data centers." - marnaq, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8Lemme see, Google's office produces [division-by-zero] percent more energy than the average other office.
- wmtrader, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6There is a great deal of unused space on top of commercial buildings that is well suited for solar energy production and this something any business can do, even more space in the paking lots.
As companies like Google spread the word of making money from solar the followers will follow and do the same.
The only hold up to a mass adoptions of this idea is business dislike of large expenses with slow pay outs.
Forget trying to talk Bob and Cindy into installing solar electric panels on their house instead come up with a tax break for business to do this on their roofs and in their parking lots.
As a Californian I would welcome parking lots covered with solar collection panels not because it is the "green thing to do" but because the summers are hot and my car bakes in the summer. - tucsonsun13, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5I'm not a true Digger, I'm not as immersed in the computer world as you guys are.
My point was that they are unique compared to most companies today. - grumpyrain, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4In most parts of the world, you are looking at an average solar energy of between 150W (London) and 300W (Sahara) per square metre. That is a physical constraint. Photovoltaic cells have for many years struggled to achieve a 20% efficiency (and that is being generous to commercially available cells which are normally closer to 10%, although some new 40% efficient demonstration designs seem promising). This means that the available power output with current technology is somewhere between 30W and 60W per square metre.
- mrsteve007, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4poisonousdrool -
We're installing 10kw of solar panels, inverters and battery backup for $93,000 before any rebates. Take off the batteries, and the cost is closer to $88k.
If Google used the more expensive 200 watt panels (like us) and didn't get a single discount for buying nearly 10k panels (I'm sure they got wholesale price), their project would have cost them 14,000,000. At that cost, they'd get an instant 4.2 million dollar tax rebate.
As for total annual power, according to the National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL) that area of California has an average of 6 kWh/m2/day. That works out to be 1.2 kWh per day per panel (at a 20% conversion rate). Soooo - 9810 panels, times 365 days, times, 1.2kWh per panel = 4.3-million kWh saved per year. 4.3 million times $0.12 per kWh = $516,000 saved per year.
If power rates don't go up, using the extremely high non-wholesale cost on panels and inverters, plus the 30% fed rebate (and ignoring local, state rebates) Google will pay off their investment in 19 years. - mesmeriffic, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5@kodek
Thanks Captain Explain-Metric-to-Digg! - ICSU, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4see http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=QVHV3vOPiag
It says 7.5 years to pay off and 25 years life span.
Considering that most operational costs only pile up and never pay off, that's rather good. - freebit50, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3To put this in perspective. The USS Nimitz can generate this much electricity in about 5.5 minutes. Additionally the USS Nimitz can create this amount of energy from matter in about 45 seconds.
- vikingcoder, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3http://www.namastesolar.com/faqs1.html#hailstorm
Solar electric panels are built with high-impact tempered glass. The solar industry standard dictates that panels should be able to withstand 3/4” hail at 60 mph. One of our solar PV panel manufacturers even performs tests by shooting ice cubes at their panels at 140 mph. If your solar panels do suffer any hail damage, you can claim the damage via your homeowner's insurance policy. - dengzhi, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3google owns. period.
- psychoselya, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Actually a googlewatt is 10^100 watts.
Ok, so it should be spelled googolwatt. Sue me. -
Show 51 - 100 of 155 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is